Cont: Musk buys Twitter II

I thought it seemed kind of apparent that Musk's main motivation to talk about buying Twitter (currently X'ed) in the first place was to get Trump back on it, probably as a way to curry favor. Or maybe just internalized outrage that a wealthy white guy could be held accountable to rules.

For people engaging with Samson...like, I'm not saying Samson IS a troll-bot of some sort, I'm just saying, it if were, could we tell the difference?
 
Well, here is Michael Shellenberger who earlier this year exposed systemic child abuse by WPATH

He exposed it? He was the leaker of the WPATH files?

I strongly doubt it. You try could provide evidence that he did, of course, but such would be largely irrelevant even if he did.

nothing to see of course by the would be global censors

He says "... They must have control of X they want total control..."

That really just sounds like you're falling for those CTs that you claim to have no interest in and don't look at. Yet again. No surprise there.

Suit you sir?

Another dishonest dodge tactic that doesn't address any of the points made and just makes you look all the more dishonest (and gullible)? Why would it?

X is the place for all truth, it is there somewhere.
It is not in NYT BBC WAPO Guardian RNZ NZ Herald CNN.
The proof is off topic as usual.

This rather looks like just another one of your usual bold statements of support for X that fall apart when subjected to even basic actual scrutiny.
 
Last edited:
samson, how can you trust a guy with dominion over what's free speech that just had an unveiling for all his new technology, a self driving car that was remote controlled, that they can't even get to work on a closed hollywood course, a bunch of ai robots that were remote controlled and some guy talking in a mic, which is better than just a guy in a suit that they pulled last time, and a self driving electric bus that seats 20 that doesn't even have 20 seats and is also remote controlled?

he's just some giant fraud it's a joke
 
X is the place for all truth, it is there somewhere.


A random character sequence generator contains all truth in there somewhere. You have to be extremely lucky to find any of it, and there's a vast amount of untruth in there as well, but at least nobody is weighting the random choices to deliberately deceive you.

X has all the same characteristics, except that last one.
 
Last edited:
Well you asked what point I was trying to make.
In the relevant post I was saying Michael Shellenberger proclaimed there was a determination by the governments to control X.
He writes books with 25% footnotes, a claim which he makes to validate his position as a fact checker.
He uses X like the vast majority of politicians, public intellectuals and so on.
Yet this thread is mainly devoted to tearing X down, putting X in its place, and suggesting it is a cess pit.

That is a summary of my point.

David Irving wrote loads of books with loads of footbotes, endnotes and citations. These books all told the lie that the holocaust didn't happen. Shellenberger is no less truthful than Irving.
 
What point are you trying to make?
Shellenberger rides the same hobby horse1 as Samson and because he uses footnotes2 he is a reliable source3 .

1. Metaphorical
2. This, for instance
3. A concept that is irrelevant to Samson
 
I thought it seemed kind of apparent that Musk's main motivation to talk about buying Twitter (currently X'ed) in the first place was to get Trump back on it, probably as a way to curry favor. Or maybe just internalized outrage that a wealthy white guy could be held accountable to rules.

For people engaging with Samson...like, I'm not saying Samson IS a troll-bot of some sort, I'm just saying, it if were, could we tell the difference?

No, the main point of Galaxy Brain buying Twitter was to allow him to massage his own ego. He wasn't getting the god-worship he felt he deserved under the old model.
 
No, the main point of Galaxy Brain buying Twitter was to allow him to massage his own ego. He wasn't getting the god-worship he felt he deserved under the old model.

No. Musk bought Twitter by mistake. His original intention was just to manipulate the share price to make some money (and maybe bully the board a bit). There was no plan for what to do when he had Twitter because he never intended to own it.
 
Shellenberger rides the same hobby horse1 as Samson and because he uses footnotes2 he is a reliable source3 .

1. Metaphorical
2. This, for instance
3. A concept that is irrelevant to Samson
I extensively footnoted my 'Earth Six' RPG scenario trilogy; does that mean Britain is a dystopian wasteland with marauding gangs of teenagers brain damaged by WOTAN?
 
I extensively footnoted my 'Earth Six' RPG scenario trilogy; does that mean Britain is a dystopian wasteland with marauding gangs of teenagers brain damaged by WOTAN?

the wotan clan ain’t nothing to **** with
 
samson, how can you trust a guy with dominion over what's free speech that just had an unveiling for all his new technology, a self driving car that was remote controlled, that they can't even get to work on a closed hollywood course, a bunch of ai robots that were remote controlled and some guy talking in a mic, which is better than just a guy in a suit that they pulled last time, and a self driving electric bus that seats 20 that doesn't even have 20 seats and is also remote controlled?

he's just some giant fraud it's a joke

sowelldonothing.jpg
 
I don't have to be an athlete to recognize when someone's running away from the finish line.
 
No. Musk bought Twitter by mistake. His original intention was just to manipulate the share price to make some money (and maybe bully the board a bit). There was no plan for what to do when he had Twitter because he never intended to own it.
This is chaos theory.
There are unexpected collisions leading to this message board, Vesta then Chuxcillub.
Musk accidentally buying Dorseys nasty little censorious swamp leads to a forum all can join and be heard.
 

Back
Top Bottom